International ranking systems for universities and institutions: a critical appraisal

Abstract

Background: Ranking of universities and institutions has attracted wide attention recently. Several systems have been proposed that attempt to rank academic institutions worldwide.

Review on the Impact of World Higher Education Rankings: Institutional Competitive Competence and Institutional Competence

“…On the contrary, they found Academic Rankings of World Universities is freer from subjectivity and per capita productivity indicates consistent research involvement (Taylor & Braddock, 2007). Moreover, Ioannidis et al, (2007) compared the two rankings and assessed the construct validity for educational and research excellence, and their measurement. They found both had no construct validity for educational and research excellence in terms of adjustment for institutional size, definition of institutions, implications of average measurements of excellence versus measurements of extremes, adjustments for scientific field, time frame of measurement and allocation of credit for excellence (Ioannidis et al, 2007).…”

International Higher Education Rankings at a Glance: How to Valorise the Research in Social Sciences and Humanities?

“…Firstly, it is a highly subjective ranking; the peer review results are strongly influenced by the country composition of the sample of experts consulted and also by the (unnamed) employers surveyed. Secondly, as Ioannidis et al (2007) indicate, it is unlikely that any expert possesses a global view of the inner workings of teaching at institutions worldwide. Its remaining indicators are also highly questionable.…”

Classifying Universities in Turkey by Hierarchical Cluster Analysis

“…Drivers of performance measurement for universities are competition for limited resources in fundraising and the need to develop effective universities (Ibáñez, Larrañaga, & Bielza, 2013). The objective, reliable, and accurate measurement of institutional performance may help with allocating funds efficiently, prioritizing research and educational investments, informing the public and stakeholders, attracting candidate students and researchers, and internal self-evaluation and improvement (Ioannidis et al, 2007). Policy makers regard measuring performance as a first step for ensuring university resources are properly allocated (Raponi, Martella, & Maruotti, 2016).…”

“…However, rankings are also criticized for the selection of indicators that make up the index. The main criticisms are that the ranking systems use measurable data rather than important and relevant qualitative ones (Stella & Woodhouse, 2007), apply different calculation formulas (Ioannidis et al, 2007), do not reward teaching (Van Dyke, 2005), and ignore the diversity of institutions (Carey, 2006). According to Raponi et al (2016), purely descriptive approaches may fail to capture the complex structure of universities.…”

“…For example, Ibáñezet al's (2013) study focused on research activity used productivity, visibility, quality, prestige, and internationalization as the performance indicators. It is argued that for better construct validity, the total number of citations should be preferred over the total number of papers in research performance studies (Ioannidis et al, 2007).…”